Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windows.networking.wireless (
More info?)
"george" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:%23rGc$PaFFHA.3728@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
"Bull Durham" <jsdbullspam@hotmail. com> wrote in message
news:uvOH9lVFFHA.624@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Thanks George,
>
> I have read your in-line reply several times. Although
> some
> it may be above my compression level, I think I will be
> able to do as you suggested. I am clear that both client
> computers need essentially the same or equal protection as
> the host from the "do bads.
>
> I did do a ShieldUp test on the Host Computer. Some parts
> appeared to have passed and some did not. I will return
> ASAP and rerun and try and understand more by rereading
> the
> info as closely as possible in a attempt to fix if
> required.
> Also, will take the two other Computer thru the test ASAP.
>
> As I understand my DSL Westel Modem and SMC Barricade
> Router
> offers me hardware protection. But, I am not sure so will
> try and find out more about the equipment. I think I have
> the MS Firewall system on the two client Computers. I
> probably will reinstall Zone Alarm. It appeared that Zone
> Alarm and Norton's were keeping my Wireless Network from
> working..
>
> Thanks Again. I do appreciate your time and effort.
>
> John
>
> "george" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message news:uA9xOESFFHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> inline
>
>
> "Bull Durham" <jsdbullspam@hotmail. com> wrote in message
> news:O2drzwRFFHA.3032@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>I am in the process of setting up a wireless network with
>> three computers using Bell South DSL and ICS.
>>
>> I think I have succeeded by solving my last problem and
>> that
>> was being able to see and be seen on the Toshiba LapTop
>> by
>> removing Norton's System Works. Do I need antiviral
>> protection, pop up blockers, ad aware, spybot, Zone
>> Alarm,
>> etc. or programs similar to this on the client computers?
>
> Not familiar with the equipement you're using for your DSL
> connection, but
> if, like you say, you are using Internet Connection
> Sharing
> (ICS) then
> basically every machine in your network only makes use of
> the 'physical'
> connection to the internet provided by 1 machine.
> That machine does nothing but 'shuffle' (if you like) the
> data through the
> network connection without looking at it, so each machine
> will have to have
> its own protection software (antiviral, blockers,spybots,
> firewall, etc.)
>
>>
>> Also, I ran a Security Check on line at Norton WWW site.
>> My
>> Hacker Exposure Check results were all closed or in
>> stealth
>> mode except for two. The two were a open ping port (ICMP
>> ping) and a HTTP port (110). Since I do send and receive
>> HTML type emails, I will assume that this open port
>> (110)
>> is open for that reason and therefore acceptable as I am
>> willing to assume the risk considering that I have Mail
>> Washer, Zone Alarm, Sybot-SD, Ad Aware SE. and AVG
>> installed. Is my assumption well thought out.
>
> Port 110 is used for mail (notably incoming mail using the
> POP3 protocol,
> like in outlook(express))
> It has nothing to do with the fact that you are using HTML
> coded
> mailmessages.
> HTML is merely a method of puttig your messages in a
> particular format,
> notably HTML format.
> You might want to check out your connection using
> ShieldsUp
> at Gibson
> Reasearch www.grc.com.
> Do the check from all of your machines, once you've got
> them
> working.
>
>>
>> Does the open ping port pose an unacceptable risk? Don't
>> I
>> need it open to operate the Wireless Network?
>
> Ideally all ports should be closed/stealthed, looking at
> them 'from the
> outside'
> 'Closed' still indicates to the world that the machine as
> such exists on the
> net.
> 'Stealth' doesn't provide any clue as to the existance of
> any machine
> whatsoever at that address/port.
>
>
>> What is the recommended solution.
>
> Use the firewall function in your DSL equipement (if
> present) or (if none
> present) a firewall solution on every machine
>
>> Am I be overly concerned with Hackers?
>
> IMHO not.
> 'Overly', maybe.
> 'Concerned' is a very good thing.
> There are some pretty sick people out there.
>
>
>>
>> I am a new DSL user (formerly on Phone dial-up) as well
>> as
>> a
>> new Network user and a ICS user.
>>
>> Thanks for any and all input to relieve my concerns or
>> correct my problem thinking.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>
> george
>
>
>
Bill,
Your Barricade router will (very likely) have an integrated
4 port switch
(on the Local Area Network or LAN side) that enables you to
physically
connect your pc's to it, using utp network cables.
It will also have the capability to provide LAN IP
addressing information
(like ip addr/subnet mask/default gateway/dns server addr)
to your pc's
(this functionality is called DHCP).
It will also have Network Address Translation (or NAT)
capability, so it
will do the address translation needed to get out to the
internet.
Because of this translation, your internal network addresses
will not be
directly accessible from the outside and this basically
constitutes a
hardware based firewall functionality.
Having said that you now have a couple of choices.
You can see if the default firewall configuration of the
router meets your
needs and adjust it if need be.
I'd definitely recommend that.
It will however entail getting into the subject of protocols
and ports in
more detail in order to do that correctly.
Next there is the SP2 Windows Firewall (part of Security
Center) that also
plays a part here.
Per default that (software based) firewall is turned on and
lacks some
functionality. Notably it doesn't examine outgoing traffic
to be traffic
that is allowed. It just 'assumes' (since it is traffic
initiated on the
inside) that it is therefor allowed. (And we all know what
'assuming' means
)
(eg. some 'malware' program that establishes contact to the
outside world,
without you knowing, will not be hindered by this firewall).
Then there are other (software based) firewalls, like you
mentioned
ZoneAlarm.
They too do a fine job, one better then the other, but who's
counting.
There is no real gain in having more than one software based
firewall
running on the same machine.
Au contraire, it will be a performance hit and possibly
increase the chance
for 'false positives', depending on how good each one of
them is.
hth (and doesn't confuse the issue)
george
Thanks again George for the good info. Sorry that I did not
reply sooner but have been busy. I did want to study or at
least read some from my 124 Page Barricade Manual and check
a little more with my DSL service provider on system type
before responding. However, I did not get around to it.
I really don't know for sure what I am talking about but
from the intro from the Barricade.
1. It provides DHCP for dynamic IP configuration and DNS
for domain name mapping.
I think my DSL provider provides DHCP - my IP address and
ADSL is different each time I check with ShieldUp..
2. Provides Stateful Packet Inspection (SPI) firewall with
client privilege, hacker prevention, and NAT.
Plus other Features and Benefits. It is 2.4 GHZ 11 MBPS
Wireless Cable/DS and 802.11b compliant. I bought it some
time ago and just now have been able to use it because I now
have DSL.
I have been playing a little trying to get Zone Alarm to
tunnel or pass sharing files and printers. I am not sure
that I am successful but can see my other computers when
Zone Alarm is turned off. This situation is also present on
my other Computers using Norton Suite on one and Zone Alarm
on the others. I think I will be able to resolve the
problem and still have software protection on the other
Computers without resorting to turning off the Firewall
Software protection. Just hope that I am not hit with any
"do bads" until I am able..
Thanks so much for your help.
John
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram